Lightweight/Traveling Tripod

[ahab1372]

Brant,
thanks for sharing your research and first impressions. Especially your analysis of ballhead size vs customer satisfaction helped speed up my decision.

I finally bought the Sirui M-3004 with the Sirui K-30x ballhead, but my requirements were different than yours: Hike-ability and minimum weight was less important, I wanted more height (

58.3"

without column extended), but still wanted a short folded length. I went with aluminum over CF for a better price. So far I'm pleased, but cannot really compare to other brands since I have never used one before (other than gorillapod). The whole thing with ballhead folds to about 20''.

[andnowimbroke]

If it's an L-plate, it gets in the way of standard shooting. I always thought I wanted the bracket to keep from re-composing a scene I want both horizontal or vertical opportunities.

[HDNitehawk]

It is a pain in the rear taking plates on and off all the time, it eats up valuable time and it brings in to play the risk that you will arrive at your destination without the plate you need, a screw missing from the plate or without the allen wrench you need to attach it. I like things clean and simple. That is why I went with the Arca-Swiss type plates and made all my gear universal. I leave the plates on all the big lens and the cameras, including the L plate on the 5D II.

Perhaps a griped 5D II would be diffrent, but the L bracket never gets in the way on the 5D II.

[neuroanatomist]

I leave the plates on all the time. As for the safety stop screws, it's always been my habit to set down the camera with the left side (and lens) resting on the surface, not the bottom, so no issues with lens plate or body plate (if any) screws. The lens plates do not present any problem or require collar rotation in the bags I use (e.g. Lowepro Toploader 75 AW for the 100-400L). The 1D X L-bracket makes it a little more challenging to zip a Toploader closed, but it works (and that plate is RRS' new modular design which is awesome - the side of the L-bracket can be removed if desired leaving just the bottom plate, and the allen key to do so actually stores right in the plate!).

[andnowimbroke]

On the older models, there is a web that comes across the bottom left of the screen. It doesn't block the screen, but does hamper the buttons next to it.

[ahab1372]

I have a plate on the camera all the time - just changed to the smaller one I have from the Joby Ballhead X, because the one that came with the Sirui ballhead blocks the battery compartment (or maybe I should buy a bigger camera - I kind of have to now, don't I?).
I also have a problem with the collar plus plate on the 70-300L not fitting in the bag. I'll either re-arrange the divider in my bag, or just remove the collar with plate attached altogether and put it elsewhere in the bag - after all, this lens is mostly hand held for me.

Edit:
My plates do not have safety stop screws. Instead, the ballhead has a safety pin that sticks up into the plate and prevents it from sliding out. The camera (Rebel T3i) sits comfortable on the flat plate when I put it on the table, or on both lens and camera plate when connected to the longer lens with collar and plate. Does the bigger body of the 7D want to tilt left/right? I cannot imagine it has much wiggle room.

[Kayaker72]

Final piece to the whole set up, the ball heads. I was able to compare the Really Right Stuff BH-30 to the Markins Q3T over a couple of weeks. The bottom line is that both of these ballheads are excellent and I could be happy with either. As a quick reference point, when these two ballheads are locked down, I can't grab the plate and move the ball. They are solid. I can do this, sometimes easily, with the Joby and Manfrotto three way head I own and a manfrotto and Benro ballhead I played with at a local camera shop. Also, just handling both of these, they feel better. I've read where people have referred to the RRS ballheads as miniture works of art. That is a fair description. And the Markins is only a quarter step below. It is very impressive and well built too.

Below are the two ballheads and an old CF card and pen for reference:

IMG_1953 small by kayaker72, on Flickr

In the end, I've selected the Markins to use. As I could be happy with either, so the reasons below may seem minor:

1. I enjoyed working with it more. The primary reason is that the locking knob is less senstive (in a good way) on the Markins than on the BH-30. With the Markins I could more easily loosen the ball so I could move it but still have enough tension that the camera would move slowly and smoothly. This had two benefits: I could more easily align a shot and, when loosening the ball, it was alot less prone to flop to the side. The RRS knob was more sensitive in that it would go from completely loose to completely locked more more quickly than the Markins. Also, when I did dial in the BH-30 to have "movable tension," it wasn't as smooth. Bryan noted in comparing it to the RRS BH-55 to the Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead that there was some "slip/stick" the the BH-55. I think that is what I observed with the BH-30 when I had tension on it.
2. The Markins has what they call a "Torque Limit Dial." This allows you to dial in the "sweet spot" where you can smoothly move the ball. The BH-30 doesn't have this, thus you are trying to dial it in each time. The RRS BH-40 and BH-55 have tension or "drag set" controls, which I believe does something similar. But the BH-30 doesn't have this feature.
3. The BH-30 had some minor deflection (~0.5-1 degree) some of the time, which was slightly more than the Markins (negligible). It was mostly apparent when I would go from "loose" to "tight" very quickly.
4. In terms of images, both of these ball heads performed extremely well with the EFS 15-85 mounted on the 7D. I really couldn't tell the difference and they were very stable. So, I tried a more challenging test, 30 sec exposures using the 100-400L @ 400 mm both connected to the ballhead via the 100-400L's foot and the 7D and both in the upright and notched positions. The Markins did a little better in these tests.

I didn't notice any "shutter slap" with either of the ballheads. At least, I was looking for shake to images at different shutter speeds and didn't see any consistent pattern.

So, a few images. 7D with the 100-400L @ 400mm, 30s, f/11, ISO 100, target 12 ft away and the lens mounted to the ballhead by the foot:
Markins Q3T:

IMG_1946 small by kayaker72, on Flickr

RRS BH-30:

IMG_1949 small by kayaker72, on Flickr

Connected to the ballhead at the 7D and not the 100-400L's foot (not that anyone would shoot this way):
Markins Q3T

IMG_1947 small by kayaker72, on Flickr

RRS BH-30:

IMG_1950 small by kayaker72, on Flickr

So, it took an extreme set up that no one would likely use to really begin to see a difference. IMO, these are two very good ballheads. Rock solid.

After all of this, my traveling/backpacking tripod system includes:

• Gitzo GT1542T tripod
• Markins Q3T ballhead
• RRS Arca-Swiss style plates
• Op/Tech Snoot Boot to protect the ballhead
• RRS Quiver Bag to hold it all (just ordered)

Thanks for all the suggestions and comments in helping me finalize my first "real" tripod. I really appreciate all the help I get from this forum.

Thanks again to Gregg (andnowiambroke) for letting me borrow the BH-30.

Brant

[eldarhau]

Thanks for sharing. It's been an interesting read!
/Eldar

[sambisu]

I bought a tripod setup specifically for backpacking last year. After much debate, I ended up with a Gitzo GT0531 and RRS BH-25. Love the combo...super light. Only change I would have made is to get the BH-30 for the panning. Took it on a 6 day backpacking trip in Glacier NP. Got the L plate as well...that is a must.


Glacier-508 by sambisu, on Flickr